This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.


Modification: In re Ernesto L.

Ruling by

James M. Humes

Lower Court

Alameda County Superior Court

Lower Court Judge

Scott Jackson
When a minor is committed to the Division of Juvenile Justice, a juvenile court must apply the minor's precommitment credits against the actual maximum custodial term imposed, not the theoretical maximum exposure term.



Court

California Courts of Appeal 1DCA/1

Cite as

2022 DJDAR 8078

Published

Jul. 29, 2022

Filing Date

Jul. 27, 2022

Opinion Type

Modification

Disposition Type

Reversed and Remanded

Case Fully Briefed

Apr. 8, 2022

Oral Argument

Jul. 6, 2022


In re ERNESTO L., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

 

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

ERNESTO L.,

Defendant and Appellant.

 

No. A162151

(Alameda County

Super. Ct. No. JV-024273-08)

California Court of Appeal

First Appellate District

Division One

Filed July 27, 2022

 

ORDER MODIFYING OPINION

AND DENYING REHEARING

 

[NO CHANGE IN JUDGMENT]

 

 

BY THE COURT:

 

It is ordered that the written opinion filed on July 12, 2022, is modified so that footnote 10 reads as follows:

 

On February 17, 2022, nearly a year after this appeal was taken, Ernesto's appellate counsel filed a motion to expedite the appeal and the related habeas proceeding. We granted the motion, even though counsel had filed four omission letters, each requiring a record augmentation; requested and obtained two extensions of time to file the opening brief; and filed an opening brief of over 100 pages. Although some of the delays were caused by circumstances outside counsel's control, some were not.

 

This modification does not change the judgment. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.264(c)(2).) The petition for rehearing is denied.

 

Dated:

Humes, P.J.

#279769

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390